RE: Tweaking in jpeg vs. RAW. The RAW file gives you tons more latitude for adjustments, starting with White Balance. The RAW adjustments are far less degrading to the image than those made in jpeg. I’m not prepared to offer all the arguments or the technical reasons, but I can tell you that when I shoot with my XT, I use RAW + jpeg setting all the time. In shooting RAW you can eliminate the camera sharpening, etc., that is made when you shoot jpeg.
The disadvantage is that there is one more step in the post process, but frequently adjustments made there minimize or eliminate adjustments after converting the image.
And of course, there’s the size of the file, particularly if you choose to convert and save a tif file to eliminate the image degradation you suffer in jpeg.
Try it, you’ll like it.
Jim
To add a few things …
What you get with JPEG is what you get. There isn’t any additional information in the format. If a highlight is blown or a shadow goes 100% black, that’s it. With RAW, you can extract almost one full stop of data out of shadows and about two stops out of highlights. Which is one of the reasons why most digital photo advice you read mentions ‘shooting to the right’ on the histogram, along with the inherent increased dynamic range in the right part of the histogram. Naturally this is just an approximation and depends on a variety of factors. RAW is also a non-lossy format and contains all the data that hits the sensor. JPEG is a lossy format and data is always destroyed when it is converted and compressed.
As far as RAW converters, alot depends on one’s preferences. Since ACR is a bit hamstrung in PSE3 and not as fully featured as the implementation in CS2, you might want to try an external (to PSE3) RAW converter. Arguably, the best on the market is Phase One’s Capture One (C1). You can try a free 14 day trial by downloading a copy from Phase One’s web site. The amount of options available can be daunting if you have never used RAW software before. So you should probably read up a bit on RAW processing prior to using any RAW editing software.
Steven,
When you get your Canon, try two things:
* Put the camera on a tripod and take a picture in artificial lighting. Take the exact same photo, twice, but once in JPEG and once in Raw. Open them up in PSE and try to modify the white balance in the JPEG, then try the same with Raw. Then post back and tell us which was easier and more powerful. 🙂
* Put the camera on a tripod and take a difficult picture with very bright areas and very dark shadows in the same picture. Again, take one Raw and one JPEG. Open them up in PSE and try to get a picture with as much highlight and shadow information as possible. (Hint: in the Raw image, you can open one version with the highlights optimized and one version with the shadows optimized, then combine them in PSE to get the best of both.)
Steven,
I looked hard at Photoshop CS-2 and the only thing I saw that was worth, for ME, the upgrade from CS was knowing how there have been little hidden improvements in ACR (the raw converter). The upgrade would also have meant I would need to trade in a couple of memory chips for larger ones.
I bought Elements yesterday and will install it tonight. I got it only to get a lower cost "subscription" to the raw converter. That is how important I consider Adobe’s RAW converter.
I found it to be very important in my work. The amount of time it has saved me and the improvement over shooting TIFF files is substantial. I had the misfortune to have to shoot a prom series. I couldn’t have done what I did with the series of pictures without it.
That gave you my opinion of the use of RAW files and how highly I value being able to keep up with newer versions.
It does take some getting used to but the learning curve is FAR less than that of learning just how to get by with Photoshop. It was well worth my time.
You will find that the EXPOSURE, BRIGHTNESS, and SHADOW controls will be very useful for those times when taking multiple spot meter readings or bracketing isn’t possible. Unlike LEVELS, you can adjust things the way YOU want them a lot easier.
I think of RAW as letting you, to a degree, re-take the photograph while your in front of the computer. It seems to be closer to that than to a slide or negative.
I would suggest that you consider turning the sharpness down to zero and do your sharpening as the final step. I normally use the "AS TAKEN" setting for color temperature or the white balance eye-dropper when a neutral grey or a white is present in the scene. At least that works best for me.
The pictures I take with my Fuji S-2 go to 13 inch x 19 inch prints in my Epson 2200. I can’t afford a 17 inch wide carriage printer. The end use is art museum show quality prints.
The above paragraph was NOT intended as a brag on equipment, OR my photographs. I put it there only so you would have an idea of how I use ACR and that I am rather "pickey" about what I use.
Bill
Bill …
The new plug in for CS2 and PSE3 is indeed the same one … but using PSE3 you will only be able to access some of the features.
So the "subscription" to the raw converter may not suit your purpose.
Wendy
Wendy,
I would be happy if ACR stayed in the "2" series. I’m not interested in direct access to curves or any of the new work flow improvements. It is the un-mentioned changes that have made, for me, each upgrade worth using. The continual improvements have made it possible for me to use ACR with my S-2 and now am able to go well past 20 inches small side, with a cropped image, while retaining the sharpness that I originally could only get with the Fuji Converter EX at 10 inches. There has also been a continuous improvement in color. Each version has been an improvement for that camera’s pictures.
My only worry is that Elements 3 won’t be able to handle the conversion to maximum size. Elements (1 I guess you would call it) was file size limited compared to Photoshop-7 and CS. (It was bundled with a scanner I had and, with Adobe’s help, de-registered it so I could transfer it when I sold the scanner.)
Bill
Well, Elements ACR 3.1 is missing the basic needs that were met with Photoshop CS’s first edition. There doesn’t seem to be a way to open a RAW file at any size other than the "standard" which does not work with a Fuji-S2.
It is crippled in that it is limited to sRGB & adobeRGB. For what I do, I HAVE to have ProPhoto to get close to the actual subjects’ color.
I see these as basic requirements and not as fancy work-flow perks.
If anyone wants a copy of Elements 3 real cheap, let me know. I’ll be glad to un-register it and mail it to you.
Bill
Bill,
There are other options to full Photoshop.. On Mac, there’s at least Capture One, and on Windows, there’s Breezebrowser and Capture One.
I’m a Capture One SE user myself, I like it a lot. To me,it’s very intuitive, easy to work with, and converts the files while I work on others. I’m on a Mac, btw. There’s also iPhoto, but it’s very, very limited. Graphics Converter, on Mac still, will permit to open and convert RAW files.
Ray
